Maine Same-Sex Marriage Referendum

Home » Maine » Page 15

Victory! Maine voters say YES to marriage equality

On November 6, 2012, Maine voted yes to marriage equality, becoming the first state in the country to win marriage equality at the ballot. Maine Question 1, An Act to Allow Marriage Licenses For Same-Sex Couples and Protect Religious Freedom, was approved by the voters of Maine 53 to 47 percent.

GLAD Law supported this marriage equality campaign in coalition with EqualityMaine, Maine Women’s Lobby, the American Civil Liberties Union of Maine, and EngageMaine, as well as national partner organizations Freedom to Marry, the Human Rights Campaign, and the Task Force.

The road to marriage equality in Maine began 6 years prior with a coalition decision to proceed with public education efforts and marriage legislation. In 2009, Maine became the first state to pass marriage equality legislation and have it signed by a governor. The victory was rescinded in November 2009 when voters approved a ballot question vetoing that law before it went into effect. The coalition regrouped, ran a two-year public education campaign, and decided in January 2012 to proceed directly to ballot.

The law took effect on December 29, 2012.

Nolan v. Labree

Home » Maine » Page 15

Addressing the issue of parentage in gestational surrogate births for the first time, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court on May 3, 2012 ruled that District Courts have the authority under current law to determine who a child’s parents are when the child is conceived through procedures like in vitro fertilization and then carried and delivered by another person.

The case, Nolan v. LaBree, involved a married couple from Massachusetts (the Nolans) in which the wife was unable to carry a pregnancy to term because of prior medical issues. That couple worked with a married couple from Maine (the LaBrees), in which the spouses agreed that Mrs. LaBree would carry a child for the Nolans created from the Nolans’ genetic material. Under a doctor’s care and supervision, the Nolans’ egg and sperm were joined, and the resulting embryo was then placed in Mrs. LaBree, who delivered the child in December 2010. The Nolans were with their son in the hospital and took him home when they were discharged.

All of the adults agreed that the Nolans were the sole parents of this child. However, because Mrs. LaBree gave birth, she and her husband were listed on the birth certificate as the child’s parents. Both the Nolans and LaBrees went to court to clarify that the Nolans are the child’s parents.

A District Court Judge found that Mr. Nolan was a parent but ruled that it did not have the power to determine maternity in a gestational carrier context, because in the Judge’s view, parentage is determined by birth. As a result, Mrs. Nolan was found to be a de facto parent, and Mrs. La Bree remained the “mother.”

The Main Supreme Judicial Court’s opinion vacated the District Court ruling and clarifies that existing law empowers the District Court to determine “parentage,” which means paternity and maternity, including in the context of gestational surrogacy. With a declaration of maternity, the Nolans can obtain a new birth certificate listing them as the sole parents of their son.

GLAD filed an amicus brief in the case on behalf of medical doctors, infertility organizations, and attorneys who specialize in reproductive technologies, including:

• American Society for Reproductive Medicine
• American Academy of Assisted Reproductive Technology Attorneys (AAARTA)
• RESOLVE
• American Fertility Association,
• New England Fertility Society
• Reproductive Science Center of New England
• Boston IVF. and
• Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology.

Joining GLAD in the amici brief were Patricia A. Peard and Kaim W. McGintee of Bernstein Shur, Sawyer & Nelson, and attorneys from the American Academy of Assisted Reproductive Technology Attorneys.

Additional amici briefs were filed by Concerned Maine Attorneys who specialize in family and child welfare law, authored by Catherine Connors, Nolan L. Reichl, and Kyle N. Kirby of Pierce Atwood; the Maine Attorney General’s Office, and John Sheldon, all seeking this same result.

NOM v. McKee

Home » Maine » Page 15

On January 31, 2012, the U.S. First Circuit Court of Appeals rejected all claims by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) that the state’s “ballot question committee” law is unconstitutional. That law requires certain individuals and donors who raise or spend money to influence a campaign to register with the state and make periodic reports about its contributors and expenditures.

GLAD filed an amicus brief, in conjunction with Pierce Atwood LLP, in support of the State of Maine arguing that disclosure serves the public interest in transparency and an informed electorate.

Blog

Home » Maine » Page 15

Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders’ Transgender Rights Project and Realty Resources Hospitality, which operates six Denny’s restaurants throughout Maine, are pleased to announce an agreement resolving a lawsuit brought by Brianna Freeman, a transgender woman who was denied access to the women’s restroom at a Denny’s in Auburn, Maine.

Realty Resources Hospitality has agreed that at all of the restaurants it operates, all transgender individuals, including Ms. Freeman, will have access to the restroom consistent with their stated gender identity.

“GLAD is pleased with the results of this case,” said GLAD Attorney Janson Wu. “We’re happy to have had the opportunity to work with business leaders to make Maine’s business establishments open and welcoming to all potential customers.”

“We recognize and support Ms. Freeman’s gender transition over the past three and half years, said Brian Mesley, a spokesperson for Realty Resources Hospitality. “Her transition and this lawsuit presented a new issue for us. It has been an educational process, and we reaffirm our commitment to provide top-notch services to all our customers. We believe the resolution of this case will work well for all of our customers and preserved the dignity and safety of all.”

The agreement brings to a conclusion Freeman v. Realty Resources Hospitality LLC, which Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders filed in Androscoggin Superior Court in 2009 on behalf of Ms. Freeman after she had been told by the manager of the Auburn Denny’s that she could not use the women’s restroom. GLAD defeated a motion to dismiss by the defendants: on May 27, 2010, the Maine Superior Court issued a critical, first-of-its-kind ruling that Maine’s law protecting transgender people from discrimination includes ensuring appropriate access to bathrooms.

GLAD then argued for summary judgment in the case, seeking a final order allowing Ms. Freeman – and other transgender Mainers – fair and equal access to the appropriate restrooms. Both parties reached agreement before the issuance of any decision regarding the summary judgment.

“The bottom line for me and other transgender patrons is that Denny’s has welcomed us to use the restroom that is consistent with how we live our lives,” said Ms. Freeman. “That makes good sense. Any other rule is just not workable for anyone.”

More about the case, including legal documents, is posted at here.

Ms. Freeman was also represented by GLAD’s Jennifer Levi and Bennett Klein, as well as attorney Jeffrey Neil Young of the Topsham, ME law firm of McTeague Higbee.

Freeman v. Denny’s

Home » Maine » Page 15

GLAD’s Transgender Rights Project and Realty Resources Hospitality, which operates six Denny’s restaurants throughout Maine, are pleased to announce an agreement resolving a lawsuit brought by Brianna Freeman, a transgender woman who was denied access to the women’s restroom at a Denny’s in Auburn, Maine.

In the settlement agreement, Realty Resources Hospitality agreed that at all of the restaurants it operates, all transgender individuals, including Ms. Freeman, will be given access to the restroom consistent with their stated gender identity.

Read the complete statement on the settlement

GLAD filed suit October 20, 2009, on behalf of Brianna Freeman, a transgender woman who was told by the manager of a local Denny’s that she could not use the women’s restroom. Denny’s moved to dismiss the case, arguing that it could apply a so-called biological rule to keep transgender women from using the gender appropriate restroom.

In its May 27, 2010 ruling, Androscoggin Superior Court denied Denny’s motion to dismiss Brianna’s gender identity claim. The Court’s critical, first-of-its-kind ruling affirmed that Maine’s law protecting transgender persons from discrimination includes ensuring appropriate access to restrooms. This was an important first step in guaranteeing that transgender people have full protections under Maine law.

On February 22, 2011 GLAD argued for summary judgment in the case, seeking a final order allowing Brianna – and other transgender Maine residents – fair and equal access to the appropriate restroom.
Sun Journal: Judge Rejects Denny’s Request to Dismiss Case Brought By Transgender Individual

Sun Journal: Woman Suing Denny’s Says She Only Wants to Be Accepted As Female

Adoption of M.A. and R.A.

Home » Maine » Page 15

The Maine Law Court issued a unanimous decision on August 30, 2007 lifting the bar on unmarried couples adopting children.
As a result of the ruling, plaintiffs Ann Courtney and Marilyn Kirby were finally able to adopt “M” and “R,” their foster children of six years.

In re A.M.B.

Home » Maine » Page 15

GLAD filed an amicus brief with the Maine high court in support of a transgender man who was denied a name change by Cumberland County Probate court. Ignoring the well-established legal standard that allows anyone to take a new name as long as it is not for fraudulent purposes, the probate judge asked persona, intrusive questions about the petitioner’s reasons for the change and then ultimately denied it.

On June 24, 2010 the Maine Supreme Judicial Court vacated the judgment of the Cumberland County Probate Court and ordered that the petitioner, A.M.B., receive a new hearing on his name change application.

Pulsifer v. Portland

Home » Maine » Page 15

GLAD represented the City of Portland, Maine against an attack on the city’s domestic partnership registry by ten-taxpayers, along with two anti-gay organizations, the Center for Marriage Law and the Alliance Defense Fund Law Center, claiming that Maine’s anti-gay marriage restriction and its general authority to regulate marriage prevented the City from providing municipal benefits to committed, unmarried families living and working in the City. On April 28, 2004, Cumberland County Superior Court Justice Thomas Humphrey ruled in favor of The City of Portland, recognizing that the Maine Legislature’s enactment of a ban on the marriage of same-sex couples did not bar the domestic partnership ordinance, and concluding that the city was well within its authority to protect the health and welfare of its citizens through the registry.

This decision came one week after the Maine legislature took steps to create equal civil rights for all its citizens. Governor John Baldacci signed into law a bill creating domestic partnerships for heterosexual or gay and lesbian adults who live together under long-term arrangements. The new law also gives domestic partners the same inheritance rights as a spouse when a married partner dies without a will and allows a surviving domestic partner to make funeral and burial arrangements.

C.E.W. v. D.E.W.

Home » Maine » Page 15

GLAD, along with Maine co-counsel, won the right to seek full parental rights and responsibilities for a non-biological lesbian mother in Maine whose former partner, the child’s biological mother, was seeking to terminate any legal relationship between our client and the child the women have raised together. Maine’s highest court (the Law Court) ruled unanimously that a de facto parent, one who has a parent-child relationship on the basis of conduct rather than merely on a biological or adoptive relationship, has equal footing to seek parental rights and responsibilities.

Guardianship of I.H.

Home » Maine » Page 15

GLAD represented a committed lesbian couple from Kennebec County who jointly decided to have children together. They took all legal steps available to them to protect their relationship with each other and their son, executing parenting agreements, wills, and other financial and medical documents. They also petitioned the Probate Court in Kennebec County for a full co-guardianship of their son so that either could act legally on his behalf.

The Probate Court Judge reported the case to the state’s highest court, the Maine Law Court, and asked whether two unmarried people may be co-guardians of a child if one is the natural parent and the other is not. On November 4, 2003, the Maine Law Court affirmed that the Probate Courts have the power to grant full co-guardianships in these cases, enabling gays and lesbians to create a legal relationship to their children. Co-guardianships are in place until the child is 18, unless it is terminated earlier to serve the child’s best interests. Unlike the “delegation of parental authority” that some parents complete, the co-guardianship does not have to be renewed every six months.